The re-issue Amperex and Mullard tubes are standard Russian tubes, and not worth the additional money. The only worthwhile modern tube is the JJ ECC83. Even with them, you have to be careful, so I would contact Bob at Euro Tubes with your request, and he'll set you up with some good tubes. The JAN Phillips are still (somewhat) reasonable in price, and really are the best tubes for V1.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Genz Benz Streamliner Tube Rolling
- Thread starter Joe Smithberger
- Start date
The re-issue Amperex and Mullard tubes are standard Russian tubes, and not worth the additional money. The only worthwhile modern tube is the JJ ECC83. Even with them, you have to be careful, so I would contact Bob at Euro Tubes with your request, and he'll set you up with some good tubes. The JAN Phillips are still (somewhat) reasonable in price, and really are the best tubes for V1.
What is the consensus on the JJ's? They have the ECC83s and the ECC803s which they claim the 803 has thicker mids? Anyone with experience? Whats the best placement?
The 803 has a longer plate structure and is brighter sounding. I like both for different reasons.
Hey guys I have a question. I have the Streamliner 600 and was wondering if I put a Jan Phillips 5751 in the V1 position is it going to give me less overall volume, or is it going to give me more clean headroom? I'm a little confused and don't want to lower the overall volume of the amp. Any help on this will be very much appreciated.
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
i would get the NOS 5751 and not worry too much about the other two, since it's the 5751 that makes the biggest difference.
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
ime, a 5751 is not going to give you lower overall volume. it'll just give you a little more clean headroom, tighten up the bass (less cloudy), and you can always use the gain control to make up for the slightly lower gain of the first preamp tube.
after playing around with LarryR's ST900, i made arrangements to buy one (his) this coming week, since i really loved that head.
Thanks that's what I was hoping to hear. I am going to buy a couple of tubes just to have on hand and thought I would try the 5751.
Two new tubes arrived today from TubeDepot:
Phillips JAN NOS 5751 for V1
(Moved Phillips JAN NOS 12AX7 from V1 to V2)
Tung-Sol 12AX7 for V3
Turns out the Tung-Sol was a dud. First I've had. Sucked my overall volume to about 10% of normal so put the previous occupant -- JJ 803S 12AX7 -- back in place.
The one difference I noticed is something that I haven't seen made clear in previous posts. The 5751 cuts overall volume slightly, so you can raise your gain knob from say 10 o'clock to 12 noon to maintain the volume you'd get using a standard 12AX7. What you get in addition is a nice touch of warm distortion (I'd call it "hair" on your tone) without having to play real loud to get it.
That's the added value of using a 5751. If you wanna sound like vintage Willie Weeks this is a way to get there ;-)
Now what to do with this dud Tung-Sol...
Cheers!
Phillips JAN NOS 5751 for V1
(Moved Phillips JAN NOS 12AX7 from V1 to V2)
Tung-Sol 12AX7 for V3
Turns out the Tung-Sol was a dud. First I've had. Sucked my overall volume to about 10% of normal so put the previous occupant -- JJ 803S 12AX7 -- back in place.
The one difference I noticed is something that I haven't seen made clear in previous posts. The 5751 cuts overall volume slightly, so you can raise your gain knob from say 10 o'clock to 12 noon to maintain the volume you'd get using a standard 12AX7. What you get in addition is a nice touch of warm distortion (I'd call it "hair" on your tone) without having to play real loud to get it.
That's the added value of using a 5751. If you wanna sound like vintage Willie Weeks this is a way to get there ;-)
Now what to do with this dud Tung-Sol...
Cheers!
"what to do with this dud Tung-Sol..."
Tube Depot said send it back and they'd replace with a new tube and credit on my account. So I mailed the dud tube back. Excellent, thank you!
Then I pulled a Tung-Sol 12AX7 from my Aggie DB359 and inserted it into V3 giving me:
Phillips JAN NOS 5751 in V1
Phillips JAN NOS 12AX7 in V2
Tung-Sol 12AX7 in V3
Sounds great at home -- thick woody warm punchy sweet...
Will put it through it's paces on tomorrow's gig: Log In | Facebook
Cheers!
Tube Depot said send it back and they'd replace with a new tube and credit on my account. So I mailed the dud tube back. Excellent, thank you!
Then I pulled a Tung-Sol 12AX7 from my Aggie DB359 and inserted it into V3 giving me:
Phillips JAN NOS 5751 in V1
Phillips JAN NOS 12AX7 in V2
Tung-Sol 12AX7 in V3
Sounds great at home -- thick woody warm punchy sweet...
Will put it through it's paces on tomorrow's gig: Log In | Facebook
Cheers!
Just did some rolling in my 900 using some old pulls from blackface Fender tremolux and Pro reverb plus some NOS GE 5751 I have. I must say, the 5751 is nice in V1. I put a used Amperex bugle boy 7025 in V2 and RCA branded Mullard ECC83 in V3. The amp opened up nicely and really has an authoritative, but airy quality to it. Actually, the Ruby select that was original in V2 also sounds good. I'm not sure how much changing V2 matters in this amp. V1 & V3 changes made a noticable difference. Of course, this is only IMO and I don't think I would spend the money to acquire these tubes if I didn't already have them. Also, in a full band situation, I wonder if myself or anyone else would notice the difference! Thoughts?
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
IME, whenever you can hear and feel a definite difference while tube rolling at home, more than the way that it sounds on a gig with a full band, i think the feel/response is what is more noticeable.
I agree! It's hard to articulate what I was hearing. There was kind of a "bloom" to the notes. Not nasty overtones, but clear and complex without any harshness. Why, in your opinion, doesn't V2 make as much of a difference? Of course, it could be that the Ruby original to V2 was a very good matchup for that slot. Also, could be that I don't have golden ears (much more likely)!
Oldtimer said:I agree! It's hard to articulate what I was hearing. There was kind of a "bloom" to the notes. Not nasty overtones, but clear and complex without any harshness. Why, in your opinion, doesn't V2 make as much of a difference? Of course, it could be that the Ruby original to V2 was a very good matchup for that slot. Also, could be that I don't have golden ears (much more likely)!
Not sure the exact technical reason as to V2 not being as sensitive or as dramatically impacting the tone, but I assume it has to do with the Bandauxhall (sp?) circuit. I have a JAN Phillips 5751 in V1 and Mullards in the v2 and v3 spot. I tried many things in the v1 slot with nominal impact, however the Mullard warmed up the mids deliciously, taking out a bit of sterility and the 5751 leaves the gain very open, transparent and pure. It can break up a tad earlier than a 12ax7 especially if you're pushing the gain stage past noon...but it's a really nice breakup...if that's what you're after...best of both worlds. As usual IME and IMO.
Well, here we go.
My first attempt to tube roll my Streamliner 600.
Replaced the stock tubes with....
V1: NOS 1961 Philips/Adzam branded 12AX7 (made in Holland)
V2 and V3: NOS 1961 Sylvania/Baldwin branded 12AX7
I know you folks have been preaching the 5751 in the V1 position, but I don't have any on hand. I'm using tubes that I have bought over the years and have been saving and storing in my closet.
She's warming up right now. We'll see how these sound
Well, I've been quite happy with these tubes in my Streamliner 600, for the last 3+ months.
I've logged many, many hours on this amp since I got it (and installed these tubes). This amp sees at least four hours (often more than that) of running time per day and these tubes just keep cranking away.
I've been satisfied enough that I didn't see a reason to mess around with more tube rolling. I think I'll just leave them in till one of the tubes starts going bad.
I able to get a variety of different tone presentations with this amp and these tubes. Big, thick, smooth warm and fuzzy ........to.... smooth, clean, rich and really punchy.
I also get a really nice woody (almost upright acoustic bass) clean tone with my Carvin B40 and Carvin's nickel flatwound strings. It is a really lovely tone. When using my Fender P-bass, it's still woody, but a different woody tone.
Here's the settings for that woody tone, should anyone be interested in trying for it. I'd be interested to see what results others could get, with their basses.
(Tube) Gain: 12:00
Volume: 3:00
Bass: Halfway between 9:00 and 10:00 or between 11:00 and 12:00. You can add a little more bass to your liking.
Mid: 8:00
Mid Feq: 600
Treble: just under 8:00
Master Volume: between 8:00 and 9:00.
Again, you can increase Master Volume depending on your room and needs.
If anyone tries it, let me know how it sounds in your system/setup.
Now I also have the Streamliner 900 (just arrived), so I'm going to try some different tubes.
svtb15
Inactive
- Mar 22, 2004
- 13,004
- 4,741
- Disclosures
- I play it all. Whatever works for the gig. Q+
I honestly dont see the advantages of tube rolling in amps when most people are using the amp on a Medium to LOUD electric gig...
I have great ears.. and the difference is so negligible if any at all, that it is hardly worth the effort or the money .. The only one making out are the tube vendors. IMO.
I feel the stock tubes a just fine the way they are.
Now if you are talking about a more controlled environment , such as a studio, or recording situation, or swapping in home listening place, stereo etc.. I can see that.. but to tube roll preamp tubes where the difference is possibly just your imagination wanting to hear a difference just doesn't work for me.. Just sayin.. Probably gonna take a flame hit for this statement . but who cares.
Using a less gain tube or a 5751 is a reasonable swap IMO.. but 12ax7 to 12ax7 is just not enough difference to justify
I have great ears.. and the difference is so negligible if any at all, that it is hardly worth the effort or the money .. The only one making out are the tube vendors. IMO.
I feel the stock tubes a just fine the way they are.
Now if you are talking about a more controlled environment , such as a studio, or recording situation, or swapping in home listening place, stereo etc.. I can see that.. but to tube roll preamp tubes where the difference is possibly just your imagination wanting to hear a difference just doesn't work for me.. Just sayin.. Probably gonna take a flame hit for this statement . but who cares.
Using a less gain tube or a 5751 is a reasonable swap IMO.. but 12ax7 to 12ax7 is just not enough difference to justify
So today I received the Streamliner 900.
I've had the Streamliner 600 for several months now and I love it.
Now I want to try some different tubes.
Along with a lot of current production tubes, I also have many NOS tubes that I have gathered over the last 20 years.
I still have 8 more of the NOS 1961 Sylvania/Baldwin 12AX7 tubes and many other NOS 12AX7 ( 60's RCA, 60's Raytheon Blackplates, 60's Mullards, 60's Amperex, GE....etc).
But digging around I realized I have a ton of 12AU7 tubes. I'd forgotten how many of these I have gathered over the years.
The thing is this, I know I just have to try them out and see how they sound.
But I'm hoping maybe there are some tube gurus in here (or someone much more knowledgable) of 12AU7 tubes and how they compare to 12AX7 and which slots (V1, V2 or V3 ) they are better suited for.
I have so many of these 12AU7 and I've come across some interesting tubes....
.... a pair of 1953 RCA JRC 12AU7 Blackplates. These are supposed to be a very sought after tube. Supposed to sound great.
Several matched pairs of 1950's/early 60's RCA Cleartop 12AU7 tubes.
a few pair of 1965 GE/Hammond Gray Shortplates.
NOS 1959 RCA/CONN Long Gray Plates
Many pair of 1959 Raytheon/Baldwin Blackplates with D-getter.
A Brimar 1960's Longplate.
1957 RCA Blackplates...
Where do I start, lol?
I've had the Streamliner 600 for several months now and I love it.
Now I want to try some different tubes.
Along with a lot of current production tubes, I also have many NOS tubes that I have gathered over the last 20 years.
I still have 8 more of the NOS 1961 Sylvania/Baldwin 12AX7 tubes and many other NOS 12AX7 ( 60's RCA, 60's Raytheon Blackplates, 60's Mullards, 60's Amperex, GE....etc).
But digging around I realized I have a ton of 12AU7 tubes. I'd forgotten how many of these I have gathered over the years.
The thing is this, I know I just have to try them out and see how they sound.
But I'm hoping maybe there are some tube gurus in here (or someone much more knowledgable) of 12AU7 tubes and how they compare to 12AX7 and which slots (V1, V2 or V3 ) they are better suited for.
I have so many of these 12AU7 and I've come across some interesting tubes....
.... a pair of 1953 RCA JRC 12AU7 Blackplates. These are supposed to be a very sought after tube. Supposed to sound great.
Several matched pairs of 1950's/early 60's RCA Cleartop 12AU7 tubes.
a few pair of 1965 GE/Hammond Gray Shortplates.
NOS 1959 RCA/CONN Long Gray Plates
Many pair of 1959 Raytheon/Baldwin Blackplates with D-getter.
A Brimar 1960's Longplate.
1957 RCA Blackplates...
Where do I start, lol?
What Mullards do you have in the V2 and V3 slots?
Are those the New Sensor Mullard Reissues?
Or are they NOS/Old Production Mullards?
So I tried a NOS 57' Raytheon Blackplate 12AU7 (which I think was actually made by RCA) in the V1 slot and kept the stock Ruby tubes in the V2 and V3 slots.
But the Gain is drastically lower than what it is in my Streamliner 600. I have tried the settings for that woody acoustic tone (that I mentioned up above in post # 174) and I had to turn the Master Volume up a little past 12:00, to get volume that equals 9:00 on my Streamliner 600.
So I'm thinking the 12AU7 is not a good V1 tube, unless your intention is to drastically reduce Gain.
I'm going to try some other NOS 12AX7 in V1 and see what happens, with the same settings.
But the Gain is drastically lower than what it is in my Streamliner 600. I have tried the settings for that woody acoustic tone (that I mentioned up above in post # 174) and I had to turn the Master Volume up a little past 12:00, to get volume that equals 9:00 on my Streamliner 600.
So I'm thinking the 12AU7 is not a good V1 tube, unless your intention is to drastically reduce Gain.
I'm going to try some other NOS 12AX7 in V1 and see what happens, with the same settings.
BTW, the NOS 57' Raytheon Blackplate 12AU7 in the V1 slot, with the Ruby Reds in V2 and V3, sounded so smooth, warm and wonderful. Very full, thick and airy.
I really love the sound, but I worry about the Gain issue I mentioned up above.
Could keeping that NOS 57' Raytheon Blackplate 12AU7 in the V1 slot and the reduced Gain damage the amp or cause problems?
It sure sounded so good. If it it doesn't cause damage/problems for the amp, I'm going to end up putting it back in the V1.
Also tried a 1961 Raytheon Blackplate 12AX7 in there, today. Didn't like it. Very sharp, thin and dry sounding. Kind of harsh sounding.
Took that out and now I'm trying an early 60's NOS Mullard in the V1 (Rubys in V2 and V3).
I really love the sound, but I worry about the Gain issue I mentioned up above.
Could keeping that NOS 57' Raytheon Blackplate 12AU7 in the V1 slot and the reduced Gain damage the amp or cause problems?
It sure sounded so good. If it it doesn't cause damage/problems for the amp, I'm going to end up putting it back in the V1.
Also tried a 1961 Raytheon Blackplate 12AX7 in there, today. Didn't like it. Very sharp, thin and dry sounding. Kind of harsh sounding.
Took that out and now I'm trying an early 60's NOS Mullard in the V1 (Rubys in V2 and V3).
